A Brookings Review Of The Clinton Effort On North Korea

[Tigermike 3,067]

A Brookings Review Of The Clinton Effort On North Korea

My earlier posts on North Korea has created a debate about when the Kim regime began its cheating on the 1994 Agreed Framework. This has taken up a large part of the comments thread on John McCain's guest post from yesterday. The Brookings Institution, hardly a apologist for conservatives, makes the timeline pretty clear in a review that has plenty of sympathy for the Clinton administration (emphases mine):

When entering office, President Bush understandably wanted to revise the Clinton administration's approach to North Korea. The latter had a number of important accomplishments over roughly a five-year stretch from 1994 to 1999, but it had stalled by 2000.

The Clinton administration helped produce the important 1994 Agreed Framework, under which North Korea effectively froze its major nuclear programs and promised effectively to undo whatever nuclear weapons progress it had earlier made at its small research reactor (the same one now at issue). At the time, the United States and allies South Korea and Japan were accused of giving in to North Korean blackmail, but the deal they signed was a smart one: energy in exchange for energy and nonproliferation.

Washington and its allies did not provide $4 billion in cash for Pyongyang, as often claimed by critics, but instead provided the dollar equivalent of a $4 billion value to produce energy that the Yongbyon nuclear facilities would otherwise have produced. If the deal had a flaw, it was that it left North Korea in possession of its spent fuel rods for too long, though it is not obvious that Pyongyang would have agreed to quickly surrender them. It also promised North Korea new types of nuclear reactors, purportedly—proliferation resistant—but not entirely free from the danger of having their spent fuel ultimately diverted to weapons purposes by the North Korean regime. But those reactors will almost certainly not be completed, so at worst the 1994 accord bought time.

Following the accord, a process of diplomacy and engagement began on the peninsula, involving summits between the leaders of the two Koreas, South Korean tourist visits into North Korea, and some reunions for families separated since the Korean War. After a North Korean long-range missile test over Japanese territory in 1998, Pyongyang adopted a moratorium on future testing, which remains in place (though it is scheduled to end in 2003).

This engagement process slowed by 2000. North Korea stalled on its promises to continue the series of summits and family exchanges. It provoked military clashes at sea. And meanwhile, though not known at the time to U.S. and allied intelligence, it had initiated a secret uranium enrichment program to add to its nuclear stockpile.

The Clinton administration continued to try to engage North Korea even as détente weakened. Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright visited Pyongyang. President Bill Clinton considered a trip as well, if his administration had first been able to clinch a deal that would buy out North Korea's missile programs and end its missile exports in return for compensation worth perhaps several hundred millions dollars a year. ...

But this approach risked encouraging North Korea to use extortion as its main tool of interaction with the outside world. Moreover, a fix that did little to reform North Korea's economy would probably have proved only temporary, making it likely that Pyongyang would try to play a similar game at a later date with other weapons. And whatever one thinks of the Clinton approach, it clearly needed to be revised once the United States uncovered evidence of North Korea's illegal and illegitimate uranium enrichment program by the summer of 2002.

So Clinton, pressed by Jimmy Carter, cut a deal with the North Koreans that allowed them to keep their spent fuel rods -- the same material for which critics blame the Bush administration -- and then watched as they continued to test long-range missiles, which the Clinton administration apparently failed to address. They also left verification out of the Agreed Framework, which made the entire agreement a fantasy. Well before the end of the Clinton administration, the North Koreans had started clandestine uranium-enrichment for weapons. Meanwhile, Clinton and Albright did nothing, although they did consider engaging in bilateral talks once again in order to pay blackmail to Kim Jong-Il, stopping only because someone finally realized that Kim could simply play that game as often as he liked.

Brookings clearly shows that the Kim regime had started its violations well before Bush took office, and that Clinton's appeasement policy gave Kim the head start he needed to build nuclear weapons. Pyongyang went nuclear before Bush had a chance to take the oath of office, and the lack of American resolve allowed it to happen.

link

[Bottomfeeder 244]

A bad policy is better than no policy.

[Tigermike 3,067]

[Bottomfeeder 244]

Did you serve? Are you a veteran? If not, then hush your mouth.

[rexbo 104]

Did you serve? Are you a veteran? If not, then hush your mouth.

Yes, that's exactly how democracy and freedom of speech works...

[Tigermike 3,067]

Did you serve? Are you a veteran? If not, then hush your mouth.

If you can't stay on subject, just refrain from posting. If you have nothing to say then keep quiet. If you can't follow a thread just shut the _uck up. There I said it three ways in the hopes you might understand one.

My serving in the military has nothing to do with you posting dumbass little cartoons to rip Bush. While Bush is mentioned, the review concerns President Clinton & North Korea.

BTW - While I didn't serve in Vietnam, but I served during the Vietnam era.

BTW II - Those who serve don't do so in order to tell those who don't to shut up.

BTW III - If you can't even come close to staying on subject, then hush your mouth, refrain from posting, or just STFU. Take your pick.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

If you can't stay on subject, just refrain from posting. If you have nothing to say then keep quiet. If you can't follow a thread just shut the _uck up. There I said it three ways in the hopes you might understand one.

My serving in the military has nothing to do with you posting dumbass little cartoons to rip Bush. While Bush is mentioned, the review concerns President Clinton & North Korea.

BTW - While I didn't serve in Vietnam, but I served during the Vietnam era.

BTW II - Those who serve don't do so in order to tell those who don't to shut up.

BTW III - If you can't even come close to staying on subject, then hush your mouth, refrain from posting, or just STFU. Take your pick.

You service sounds like Bush's, only difference is you showed up for duty. And, just like his service (or lack of) he is missing in action on the subject of NK by ignoring them and hoping they will go away.

Mouth!

[Tigermike 3,067]

Once more for the simpleton.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

Once more for the simpleton.

How can't you take someone's political view and deem them stupid or dumb? It seems to me that someone of your caliber should not come to such conclusions without significant research. If you are making your conclusions based soley on my posts, then you are living outside of the realm of reality. Furthermore, your blind trust in leadership is characteristic of one who has no conceptual identity. Seems as if you must clean your own house first.

[Tigermike 3,067]

How can't you take someone's political view and deem them stupid or dumb? It seems to me that someone of your caliber should not come to such conclusions without significant research. If you are making your conclusions based soley on my posts, then you are living outside of the realm of reality. Furthermore, your blind trust in leadership is characteristic of one who has no conceptual identity. Seems as if you must clean your own house first.

Once again, I am typing real slow so you can understand, it has nothing to do with your political views. It has everything to do with staying on subject. That is all. If you can't post and even come close to the subject at hand, just refrain. Plain and simple. This has not been a personal attack on you nor has it been an attempt to squash your hatred of President Bush. Personally I could care less what you think of him or anyone else.

As far as your statement "living outside of the realm of reality". If that were the case, I would be in close contact with you.

Throw stones all you wish, but the bottom line is this. If you can't even come close to the subject of a thread, then don't post.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

How can't you take someone's political view and deem them stupid or dumb? It seems to me that someone of your caliber should not come to such conclusions without significant research. If you are making your conclusions based soley on my posts, then you are living outside of the realm of reality. Furthermore, your blind trust in leadership is characteristic of one who has no conceptual identity. Seems as if you must clean your own house first.

Once again, I am typing real slow so you can understand, it has nothing to do with your political views. It has everything to do with staying on subject. That is all. If you can't post and even come close to the subject at hand, just refrain. Plain and simple. This has not been a personal attack on you nor has it been an attempt to squash your hatred of President Bush. Personally I could care less what you think of him or anyone else.

As far as your statement "living outside of the realm of reality". If that were the case, I would be in close contact with you.

Throw stones all you wish, but the bottom line is this. If you can't even come close to the subject of a thread, then don't post.

As per the subject at hand, at least Clinton attempted engagement rather than ignoring NK as this administration has done so successfully.

[Tigermike 3,067]

As per the subject at hand, at least Clinton attempted engagement rather than ignoring NK as this administration has done so successfully.

By engagement you mean talking nice and allowing them to do what ever they want? Giving them the food and aid they want with little or no sanctions? That worked well didn't it?

[Bottomfeeder 244]

Well, at least we knew what they were doing. I say give them nothing and drop an EMF bomb on 'em. And, get Kim Jung Il a pyschiatrist and hairstylist. Or better yet, just kill the ########.

[Tigermike 3,067]

Well, at least we knew what they were doing. I say give them nothing and drop an EMF bomb on 'em. And, get Kim Jung Il a pyschiatrist and hairstylist. Or better yet, just kill the ########.

No you or anyone else knew what they were doing. They told Carter & Clinton they would stop and the dems believed them. Now guess what? They have it. That is not to place all blame on Clinton, just an observation of fact.